What's new

Pakistan cuts supply lines to Nato forces

even if gop cut all the supply routes nato has the option offerd from russia for supplys into afghanistan

Russian bid to replace Pakistan as supply route: War in Afghanistan

WASHINGTON, April 1: At the Nato summit, which begins in Bucharest on Wednesday, Russian President Vladimir Putin is expected to offer an alternative route for supplying US and Nato troops in Afghanistan.

The proposal, if accepted, will change the course of the war in Afghanistan and will also have far-reaching consequences for Pakistan as Nato’s 43,000 troops in Afghanistan rely heavily on supplies transported via Pakistan.

Diplomatic sources in Washington told Dawn that Russian and Nato diplomats have already held a series of “productive and successful” talks on a plan that would allow non-military material – such as clothing, food and petrol – to cross Russia by land.

The plan, however, could later be expanded to include ammunition and light weapons as well, the sources said.

Russia’s new ambassador to Nato Dmitri Rogozin played a key role in selling this plan to the members of this US-led alliance, telling them that this will be a reliable alternative route free of violence and political troubles.

While America’s European allies have shown great interest in the proposal, the Americans are still reluctant as they do not want to bring Russia back to a region from where it was forcibly ousted in 1989, after battling Afghan freedom fighters (now Al Qaeda and Taliban militants) for almost 10 years.

Despite Washington’s reluctance, the Nato has held intensive talks with Russian officials on the precise routes to be used and hopes to reach agreement at this week’s summit in Bucharest.

If approved by the summit, the supplies can begin as soon as Nato wants as the Russians already have a functioning route passing through Russia, Kazakhstan and Uzbekistan.

Under the proposed agreement, Russia and the Collective Security Treaty Organisation, a military alliance of former Soviet republics, will jointly guarantee an interrupted supply of essential goods to the Nato forces.

Western diplomatic sources in Washington told Dawn that Nato sees the proposed route as a good alternative for supplies going through Pakistan which faces political uncertainty and may not be a reliable route for long.

The Pakistan route, according to these sources, passes through the Taliban-infested tribal zone and has become increasingly dangerous. Last Sunday, militants blew up a convoy of 36 oil tankers meant for US forces in Afghanistan.

Russian diplomats promoting their proposal also have underlined a so-called “crisis of trust” between the United States and Pakistan, where the new government plans to engage militants in a dialogue opposed by Washington.

They also argue that Russia has always had a strong interest in seeing the Nato mission in Afghanistan succeed because Moscow wants to prevent Muslim extremists enter the former Soviet republics.

But there are others in Washington who warn that an attempt to disassociate Pakistan from any plan for Afghanistan may have dangerous consequences.

In an article published on the eve of the Nato summit, Karl F. Inderfurth, a former US assistant secretary of state for South and Central Asian affairs, describes Pakistan as “one country that can make or break (Nato’s) mission” in Afghanistan.

He notes that Nato’s Secretary General Jaap de Hoop Scheffer has promised to visit Islamabad as soon as the new Pakistan government is in place.

“After Bucharest there is no better destination to reinforce Nato’s Afghan mission,” says Mr Inderfurth while backing the proposed visit.

Mr Inderfurth urges Nato leaders to work on a “new compact” that addresses Afghanistan and Pakistan’s political, economic and security concerns and seeks to neutralise regional and great power rivalries.

To attain this, he proposed an UN-sponsored, a high-level conference of all Afghanistan’s neighbours and concerned major powers for talks on a multilateral accord that addresses Pakistan’s concerns about developments in Afghanistan.

The proposed accord should recognise Afghanistan’s borders with Pakistan, pledge non-interference in Afghanistan’s internal affairs, recognise Afghanistan as a permanently neutral state and establish a comprehensive international regime to remove obstacles to the flow of trade across Afghanistan.

Mr Inderfurth also warns that any large-scale outside military intervention in Pakistan’s tribal areas would be disastrous for the Pakistani state and US interests.

Instead, he urges working with Pakistan’s new leadership to integrate the tribal region into the Pakistani political system and provide substantial assistance to build up their economy and social infrastructure.

Russian bid to replace Pakistan as supply route: War in Afghanistan -DAWN - Top Stories; April 02, 2008

but beacause of georgian conflict i don,t think russia will agree now if requested
 
.
sir its old news you forget that Russia now don't do this after war of Georgia NATO Russia become on hard point of there relations.and Pakistan is the best way why u forget other side taliban's stronger side
 
.
NATO foreign ministers warn Russia to withdraw from Georgia
By Helene Cooper and Tom Rachman Published: August 19, 2008

BRUSSELS: After emergency talks here, NATO foreign ministers on Tuesday urged Russia to pull its troops immediately out of Georgia, saying there could be no "business as usual" between the alliance and the Kremlin until it withdraws.

After the meeting, NATO announced a new commission between the alliance and Georgia, intended to strengthen the country's ties with the organization.

The warning for Russia to withdraw came after days of mounting frustration among alliance nations at Russian defiance over its military action in Georgia.

Russia signed a French-brokered cease-fire, but Moscow has failed since then to remove its troops from key areas, despite promises that it would.

The foreign ministers from the 26 NATO nations expressed concern over "continuing reports of Russia's deliberate destruction of civilian infrastructure."

Today in Europe
EU split over Ukraine's path to membershipU.S. to withdraw proposed nuclear pact with RussiaWar splits Orthodox churches in Russia and Georgia
"Russian military action has been disproportionate and inconsistent with its peacekeeping role," the ministers said in a statement after the meeting, urging Russia "to take immediate action to withdraw its troops from the areas it is supposed to leave."

Before the talks, the U.S. secretary of state, Condoleezza Rice, accused Moscow of bullying its neighbors with its far superior military power and of reverting to its Cold War behavior.

Rice said Monday that the United States would not push for Georgia to be allowed into NATO, a tacit admission that America and its European allies lack the stomach for a military fight with Russia.

Foreign Secretary David Miliband of Britain said before the meeting that the priority was "to provide practical and political support to Georgia," The Associated Press reported.

The alliance must "ensure Russia does not learn the wrong lessons from the events of the last two weeks," he said.

"Force cannot be the basis for the demarcation of new lines around Russia."
 
.
Russia warns NATO nations

Vladimir Radyuhin


Three areas of disagreement





MOSCOW: Russia said it would not “close eyes” and would “react” to Western moves that undermine its security.

Speaking at a meeting in Moscow of the Russia-NATO Council on Tuesday, Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov said Russia and the alliance should ensure each other’s security, and not “strengthen one’s own security at the expense of the other.

“I will be frank: we are not going to close our eyes to such steps, we will react,” said Mr. Lavrov.The Moscow meeting marked the fifth anniversary of the founding of the NATO-Russia Council, and the 10th year of partnership. He warned NATO against unilateral steps that would compromise Russia’s national security.

He named three main areas of disagreement with NATO: United States plans to deploy missile defences in Eastern Europe, which Russia views as a threat, the problem of the Conventional Forces in Europe treaty, which NATO has failed to ratify, and the problem of Kosovo.

Russia is bitterly opposed to the West’s proposal to recognise Kosovo’s independence from Serbia despite the latter’s opposition.

NATO Secretary-General Jaap de Hoop Scheffer admitted that the alliance and Russia remained split on these issues, and urged Moscow to tone down its rhetoric against NATO and the U.S.

“We should continue discussions on subjects where we do not see eye-to-eye, be it Kosovo, be it missile defence, be it the Conventional Forces in Europe Treaty,” he said.

Stout defence

Reuters reports:

Mr. Scheffer mounted a stout defence of Washington’s missile shield plan.

“You don’t have to be Einstein to understand that 10 interceptor rockets don’t pose any threat to Russia and the Russian people”.

He underlined the shield was aimed at shooting down missiles fired by “rogue” states such as North Korea and Iran and said Russia too faced a threat from them.

“We were enemies and we tried to destroy each other but that era has now finished,” Mr. Scheffer said.





Printer friendly page
 
.
America has only one option, and that is Pakistan. Pakistan can use this to get a grip, whether or not they can enjoy such a position or is up to the highest authority.
 
.
America has only one option, and that is Pakistan. Pakistan can use this to get a grip, whether or not they can enjoy such a position or is up to the highest authority.

you 100%right sir USA can't win this war without pakistan help if we keep them alone in this time USA will leave afghanistan in 1 year:wave:
 
.
America has only one option, and that is Pakistan. Pakistan can use this to get a grip, whether or not they can enjoy such a position or is up to the highest authority.
I so wish they go through Russia...

Leave us the damn alone!
 
.
you 100%right sir USA can't win this war without pakistan help if we keep them alone in this time USA will leave afghanistan in 1 year:wave:

if we do this pakistan will be labeld as a terrorist nation and there will be yankee soldiers in peshawar:usflag:
 
. .
if we do this pakistan will be labeld as a terrorist nation and there will be yankee soldiers in peshawar:usflag:

Guss, its a fear which was put in our minds by westrn media, but practicly it will not work 1000%. thoughts like these,& the statments like( WE' LL BOMMB YOU TO STONE AGE) actully were not a practical options in the ,longer terms and also in the shorter terms for USA.
As, we can see around the world ,there are many nations serviving against the will of USA. ( CUBA, IRAN, VENEUZEVELA, CHINA, VEITNAM, NORTH KOREA).

We, should make it clear to our leadership, that we should stop the so calked " DOLLAR KI TALASH".& start deciding our future in ISLAMABAD, insteed of some , AIRCRAFT CARRIER IN THE GLUF?:angry::sniper::usflag:
 
.
according to the DAWN newspaper of today Sunday, there are two govt versions. one by the interior minister and the other by our shoe-maker turned defence minister.

1. the interior minister says there was no stoppage in the supplies for NATO forces in afghanistan. they had to clear the torkham road of miscreants on our side of the border.

2. the defence minister claims that govt decided to suspend supplies due to issues with US/NATO recent incursions into pak territory.

if you want my honest opinion - this is a clear example of the current govt. having "no clue" as to whats going on!

i would concur with icecold - we will not stop their supplies deliberately even though their alternate route thru tajikistan is currently under threat due to strained US/Russia relations over georgia.
 
.
I doubt that Pakistan can decide to stop helping ISAF. Either something as a caarot will be delivered or they will be pushed to make it happen. The Pakistani nation is divided and unreliable. The politicians are there not to serve the nation. Frankly I do not understand why they stop delivering. We should add firepower and help destroy elements in afghanistan... Not using Ramadan to extend the period for them to regroup. Besides tha we should occupy parts of Afghanistan to make Pakistan more secure.
 
. .
Ministries of defence, interior take varying positions: Suspension of Nato supplies to Afghanistan

By Aman Azhar

ISLAMABAD, Sept 6: The ministries of interior and defence have taken diametrically opposite positions on the issue of halting Nato supplies to Afghanistan via the Torkham border post.

While the former says it is a temporary disruption because of ‘security concerns’, the latter insists that the government decided to stop the supplies indefinitely because Pakistan has issues with the allied forces’ recent incursions inside the Pakistani territory.

Talking to DawnNews at the Prime Minister’s House, PM’s Adviser on Interior Rehman Malik said the government had not stopped Nato supplies through Pakistan.

“The Nato supplies were temporarily halted after around 20 soldiers of the Frontier Constabulary were captured by the militants in the area from where the supplies cross into Afghanistan,” Mr Malik said.

“In fact, let me tell you that three trucks carrying Nato supplies were attacked en route to Afghanistan, compelling the government to secure the area,” he said.

Mr Malik said the supplies were given a go-ahead on Friday night after security forces had secured the area. Earlier in the day, the Minister of Defence Ahmed Mukhtar had said exactly the opposite.

“The government has stopped the oil supply to Nato forces following attacks into Pakistan’s territory,” Mr Mukhtar told DawnNews.

“The attacks by international forces deployed in Afghanistan had been continuing despite protests lodged by Pakistan”, he added.

Observers say the latest claim by Mr Malik, within hours of the Defence minister’s statement, and less than 24 hours after 30 trucks taking Nato supplies had been stopped for an indefinite period smacks of the prevailing confusion within the government on what policy to pursue in the wake of continuing attacks by US-led forces inside Pakistan’s territory.


Ministries of defence, interior take varying positions: Suspension of Nato supplies to Afghanistan -DAWN - Top Stories; September 07, 2008
 
.
American have made their path clear for next few months, by installing Zardari as President. This is not as simple as we are thinking, supply line cut propoganda is also US suggested....
 
.
Back
Top Bottom